Slavery and the Good Ol’ Days?

Last week’s public hearing on proposed social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools drew an interesting assortment of right-wing groups and ideologues. In fact, as the State Board of Education heard testimony inside the meeting room, Tea Partiers rallied in the lobby.

The “rally” — if you can call it that — seemed mostly to be a bust, with a fairly small turnout among supporters. In any case, speakers called on the state board to adopt new standards that essentially whitewash difficult problems and periods in American history. Focus on the positive, they urged.

Take slavery for example. Why bother teaching students that for centuries the American colonies and states built economies based on the labor of enslaved Africans? No, Tea Partiers want schools to focus instead on how America finally ended slavery. Otherwise, schools are supposedly “politicizing” American history.

Really? Well, see for yourself:

“The worst day in America beats the best day in any other country”? Really? We doubt slaves would have thought so.

And yes, that’s board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, smiling off to the side in a red sweater.

33 Responses to “Slavery and the Good Ol’ Days?”

I wonder how many African-Americans would agree with Mr. Moore’s statement. A show of hands, please. And can we please hear from Native Americans? There was nooooo such thing as ethnic cleansing in America. NO SIR-EEEE!!

So there you have it. Everyone will hate me for this but if a Republican can win in navy blue Massachusetts (and on such a big margin), what gives us the idea progressives can win in scarlet red Texas? Keep on fighting; just know that we’re salmon swimming against increasingly right-flowing current.

No one hates you Cytocop. However, we do have some concern as to what cytology shift you work. You always comment late at night when the rest of us have gone away.

You know. Something else may be going on here. On CNN tonight, they had a politically Independent commentator on (I forget his name) who is a regular columnist for the Daily Beast. He is a real, self-identified mainstreamer. Here is what he thinks, and he was adamant about it tonight. I think he might just be right, and it is actually something I have said here at TFN in months past.

He thinks most of the American people have shifted to the center. What does that look like mathematically? I don’t know, but my best guess would be about 15 percent hard core right wing radical fruitcakes and 15 percent hardcore left wing, and they tend to be independent voters. radical fruitcakes. The other 70 percent of people lie along some portion of the spectrum that could be defined as “middle of the roaders.” He thinks the right wing radicals are the Republican Party base, and the left wing radicals are the Democratic Party base.

So, what does that mean? He thinks last night’s election in Massachusetts was not an embracement of radical right wing conservatism or the Republican Party—not at all. He believes it was simply the political middle’s repudiation of the radical left wing fruitcakes that form the base of the Democratic Party. But here’s the kicker. He thinks the radical right wing Republican fruitcakes like Mitch McConnell are making the exact same mistake that the Democrats did after the election last fall—that being that an election success means the American people are giving a great big bear hug to the radical right. Speaking as an independent himself and on behalf of independents, he thinks the Republican Party (dominated by the radical right now) is hated equally by the American people in the middle. Therefore, if that continue this crap like the Texas SBOE is doing on nationwide scale, they are going to find themselves in the same place they were in the 2006 and 2008 elections. With both the Democratic Party and Republican Party, most ordinary Americans are just plain sick and tired of the radicalism, squabbling, and failure to cooperate for the good of our country.

Most people are ready now for moderate representatives in government. On the Republican side, that would be someone like Richard Nixon or Howard Baker, Jr. On the Democratic side, it would be someone like Andrew Jackson or Woodrow Wilson. And then again, it might mean a moderate thirdy party candidate who can appeal to 70 percent of the American people.

So, with regard to health care reform, what might that mean? The radical left has lost control of the issue now. It is a well known fact that most of the American people want significant and fair health care reform of some sort. It is not enough for the radical right fruitcakes in the Republican Party to simply defeat the radical left wing fruitcake health care plan and just walk away. Huh-uh. Not this time. It is time for the right wing Republican Party fruitcakes to step up to the plate and propose their own national health care plan—and be serious and fair to the American people about it. Otherwise, that 70 percent in the middle is going to kick their butt down mainstreet just as badly as the butt-kicking you saw last night.

Basically, that was the independent guy’s assessment—that what we saw last night was a major sea change to the middle in American politics—and any radical Democrat or Republican fruitcake (15 percenter) who ignores that or brushes it off is going to wake up one morning as a political leper with oozing sores and a badly kicked butt. The funny thing here, and this is going to be hilarious to watch, is that the radical right and radical left are so entrenched in what they believe that they have no perception of what a “middling” postion might look like and probably no idea of how to get there. For one thing, it would require something they have a total inability to do—and that is “compromise” on their positions. I can hear them now. “Compromise is complicity with evil.” Well, maybe, but while you guys are sorting that out, 70 percent of the American people in the MIDDLE will be voting for some third party candidates who do know how to reach a compromise position on issues and legislation. Does anyone want to start a third national party? Maybe it could be called the Party of the Average American (PAA). I am sure someone could come up with a better name.

No one hates you Cytocop. However, we do have some concern as to what cytology shift you work. You always comment late at night when the rest of us have gone away.

You know. Something else may be going on here. On CNN tonight, they had a politically Independent commentator on (I forget his name) who is a regular columnist for the Daily Beast. He is a real, self-identified mainstreamer. Here is what he thinks, and he was adamant about it tonight. I think he might just be right, and it is actually something I have said here at TFN in months past.

He thinks most of the American people have shifted to the center. What does that look like mathematically? I don’t know, but my best guess would be about 15 percent hard core right wing radical fruitcakes and 15 percent hardcore left wing radical fruitcakes, The other 70 percent of the American people lie along some portion of the spectrum that could be defined as “middle of the road.” He thinks the right wing radicals are the Republican Party base, and the left wing radicals are the Democratic Party base.

So, what does that mean? He thinks last night’s election in Massachusetts was not an embracement of radical right wing conservatism or the Republican Party—not at all. He believes it was simply the political middle’s repudiation of the radical left wing fruitcakes that form the base of the Democratic Party. But here’s the kicker. He thinks the radical right wing Republican fruitcakes like Mitch McConnell are making the exact same mistake that the Democrats did after the election last fall—that being that an election success means the American people are giving a great big bear hug to the radical right and its total ideological package.

Speaking as an independent himself and on behalf of independents, he thinks the Republican Party (dominated by the radical right now) is hated equally by the American people in the middle. Therefore, if they continue this crap like the Texas SBOE is doing on a nationwide scale, they are going to find themselves in the same place they were in the 2006 and 2008 elections. With both the Democratic Party and Republican Party, most ordinary Americans are just plain sick and tired of the radicalism, squabbling, and failure to cooperate for the good of our country.

Most people are ready now for moderate representatives in government. On the Republican side, that might be someone like Richard Nixon, Howard Baker, Jr., or even Tincy Miller. On the Democratic side, it might be someone like Andrew Jackson or Woodrow Wilson. And then again, it might mean some moderate third party candidate who can appeal to 70 percent of the American people.

So, with regard to health care reform, what might that mean? The radical left has lost control of the issue now and is essentially defeated on health care. However, it is a well known fact that most of the American people STILL WANT significant and fair health care reform of some sort. It is not enough for the radical right fruitcakes in the Republican Party to simply defeat the radical left wing fruitcake health care plan and just walk away. Huh-uh!!! Not this time!!! It is time for the right wing Republican Party fruitcakes to step up to the plate and propose their own national health care plan—and be serious and fair to the American people about it. Otherwise, that 70 percent in the middle is going to kick their butt down Main Street just as badly as the butt-kicking you saw last night.

Basically, that was the independent guy’s assessment—that what we saw last night was a major “sea change” to the middle in American politics—and any radical Democrat or Republican fruitcake (15 percenter) who ignores that or brushes it off is going to wake up one morning as a political leper with oozing sores and a badly kicked butt.

The funny thing here, and this is going to be hilarious to watch, is that the radical right and radical left are so entrenched in what they believe that they have no perception of what a “middling position” might look like and probably no idea of how to get there. For one thing, it would require something they have a total inability to do—and that is “compromise” on their positions. I can hear them now. “Compromise of any kind is complicity with evil.” Well, maybe, but while you guys are sorting that out, 70 percent of the American people in the MIDDLE will be voting for some third party candidates who does know how to reach a compromise position on issues and legislation. Does anyone want to start a third national party? Maybe it could be called the Party of the Average American (PAA). I am sure someone could come up with a better name.

First of all, your kids are not in school to learn that America is a great country. Your kids are there to learn about America, warts and all. It’s interesting that he chose slavery. The United States was one of the LAST major country to give up slavery and went through a civil war to do it.

NOT our finest hour. Certainly not one of the historical events I would showcase as American greatness.

And Charles: You may be right, but that 70% “in the Middle” you talk about are still voting either Republican or Democrat. When they get fed up with one party, they go to the other. They don’t go looking for a compromise between the two.

Charles: This isn’t the “first time” this has been going on since the Nixon era. Neither party wants to give the people what they want, and neither party wants to actually solve the problems that exist, but every time a third party stands up and says “We got a better way” they get snubbed for air time and called crazy, and the public buys it. I don’t think Ron Paul is a member of the Republican party because he thinks the Republicans are the way to go. His policies are further from the Republicans than the Democrats are, but he knows he hasn’t got a prayer if he goes off and forms his own party or joins one of the standard “Third parties” who get the same tiny slice of voters in every election.

I don’t say this because I don’t think things will change. I think they will, but things will get a LOT worse before they get better. The way we’re going when we get true change it will be on the business end of a lynch mob. I would prefer a more amicable change that doesn’t involve me building a bomb-shelter and stocking up on ravioli and ammunition.

I would really like to know how the upstanding PC citizen came up with the solid conclusion that the worse day in America is better than the best day in any other country? What an asinine thing to state to the world. How can he possibly be sure of that? Better than France, Italy, Brazil, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden or Denmark? I don’t think that the upstanding citizen realizes that in a recent poll the happiest people are in Denmark, and America came in around 21st place. Hm. Someone’s info is certainly incorrect. What a real embarrassment this is to Texas. Really. I’m in Florida for a year and a half and was going to return to Austin but am contemplating moving to the pacific Northwest now. I hope these idiots don’t get their say-so. We also can’t leave out what was done to the Native Americans, the stealing of half of Mexico for the U.S., the treatment of Mexicans in California (Zoot Suit Wars), not to mention all of the Immigration sweeps that are rampant right now with all of the hate directed at Hispanics, and we certainly can’t leave out Eugenics now can we? How would you whitewash that? I guess by just not mentioning it.

Manny Aguilar: It doesn’t matter if he’s right or not. It’s not the job of the public school system to be a propaganda arm of the government, which is what this man is advocating. If the US is the greatest country in the world, then it should be apparent in what we do, not how we spin what we do. It’s just ironic that he picked one of the darkest days in American history as an example of how “great” we are. How America dealt with slavery is a very good example of what NOT to do. We did practically everything wrong and the entire country was almost destroyed as a result. Go team!

On the other hand, Jason might have a point. Taking the perspective that African-Americans overcame such an evil as slavery would be a way to celebrate the courage and hope that sustains people in bad times and motivates them to create change. Creating a victim mentality is not empowering, is is embittering. Why are Americans so angry now? History teaches that in many things were worse in the past, yet it seems like there is a lot more complaining now.

I actually taught U.S. History and other social studies subjects for 33 years until I retired at the end of May in 2009. History cannot be politicized until after the event(s) has/have occurred. History is what it is, a record of events that occur at a particular time. Since history is a record, it should be reported and taught as such. What happened, happened. In this debate it is the students who will get short-changed. Students in AP history classes who opt to take the AP Exam will be at a disadvantage if they do not receive all of the information. For example, if the test has an essay question that asks the student to compare and contrast the economic, social, and political causes and effects of the Civil War, including the roles of prominent pro slavery individuals and abolitionists, the student would lose points if the state curriculum focuses only on the fact that America eventually repudiated the practice of slavery. The curriculum would leave out important information the student would need to respond to the question. It would also place Texas students at a disadvantage when they enter college. A better prepared high school student is usually a more successful student in college. As one who actually worked in the field of education and taught social studies, this politicization of the historical record is very troubling. I want all of our students to be prepared to compete successfully at state, national, and international levels. It is sad to say, but the exchange students that I taught during my career knew more U.S. History when they entered my classroom than the students who were American citizens, and this trend will continue as long as Americans place love of ideology over the pursuit of knowledge.

Maria says: “History teaches that in many things were worse in the past, yet it seems like there is a lot more complaining now.” How do you know that, Maria? And why is it so terrible to complain about injustice? Heck, if nobody complained about anything there would be no civil rights laws, women still couldn’t vote, Jim Crow would still be enforced. Perhaps that is the America Maria would prefer.

Thanks for your thoughts, Charles. Unfortunately, nobody can define what is “radical” left and what is “radical” right. What is radical to me might be perfectly sound and reasonable to someone else, and vice versa.

Did you all hear today’s news about what our wonderful conservative corporate butt-kissing “Supreme” Court justices have done? They have totally given elections to Corporateamerica. Man, I was even more correct about the current state of politics than I thought!! In equating money with voice, they have declared that those with the most money will have the loudest voices. Those without money, well too bad for you!

Corporations will totally take over the air waves, buying up every political spot to oppose or condone the candidate of THEIR choice. Think there are too many political ads? You ain’t seen nothing yet! And whatever candidate is NOT friendly to Corporateamerica – anyone who does not kowtow to them and kiss their balls – will be verbally assassinated (and maybe even actually assassinated). All it will take is one or two candidates to be buried by the Corporate onslaught, and those who survive will be left cowering. They will be nothing more than corporate representatives. (They basically already are. It’s just that now it’s been made official).

And it won’t stop there. Now, thanks to the traitorous Supreme Court, FOREIGN corporations will influence American elections just as much as domestic corporations. What’s to stop them?

Did you hear what Newt Gingrich has said? Of course, he is just ENTHRALLED over this. Says now finally the middle class will have a chance in elections. WTF?? How the hell is a middle-class candidate supposed to go up against a corporate-backed candidate? Newt must be smokin’ the best pot in the world.

Oh yes, I know. Corporations still are not allowed to support DIRECTLY any party or candidate. Do you really think that’s going to stop them from getting everything they want? They control Congress so they’ll just shoot that restriction down or their attorneys will find a way around it.

So, representative government is no longer even a pretense; it’s a farce. Government is totally corporate-run, corporate-financed, and corporate-controlled. It will be taxation without representation all over again.

Bringing this back to the topic of education, you can bet your sweet bippies Corporateamerica will make sure history textbooks are as friendly to them as possible, and everything that is troubling America will be blamed on the unions. They’ll teach that child labor restrictions, the 8-hr workday, the 40-hour workweek were disastrous to business and should be repealed. Serfdom, here we come!

Majii, I would disagree with your characterization of history. I do this because in my state, Florida, the view that “history is…a record of events that occurred at a particular time” is written into law now. But history isn’t just dates and facts, it’s a narrative – or rather, a series of narratives. As long as historians and history teachers keep on taking the view that history is a list of dates were such-and-such events happened, history will continue to be the least popular subject in schools (BELOW MATH!). This creates an atmosphere where history is taught as events occurring in some sort of vacuum. For example – The Mexican Revolution occurred in 1910. This is a well-known “fact.” However, it is also completely open to argument – did it really begin in 1910, or was this just the stage of armed conflict that preceded the real revolution – the revolution of state power that began with the 1917 constitution. It is also a well known fact that the Mexican Revolution ended in 1920. However, radical institutional changes and intermittent peasant rebellion continued to occur in the country until 1940 and even afterwards.

I’m not trying to attack you, I’m sure you were a great teacher – I admire that you taught high school. However, I think we need to be careful about how we characterize our field. History is dynamic, it is mutli-faceted, it is organic. It is dates, names, facts…and it is also the story of human civilization. This, of necessity, is incredibly complex and should be honestly presented as such. There is no such thing as an “open and shut case” of history.

I don’t think it’s possible to look at history with a completely apolitical eye. Judgment, whether political or moral, is almost inevitable when studying or teaching history. However, those views belong in the CLASSROOM, in academic discussion, in lectures, and in scholarly journals, in discussions between colleagues, or with your friends. They do NOT belong in school board or government meetings. History is best left to the historians and the teachers – not school boards, who inevitably don’t know what the fuck they are talking about.

It pains me to see the sort of ignorance on display in the video. These idiots would have us believe that schools are simply factories to create ultra-nationalist political automatons like themselves. History can be a great force for good in this world – teaching children to be critical thinkers, brilliant writers, and great researchers. They can help us uncover the mysteries of our past and help us understand the complexities of our present.

I agree with Cytocop. The U. S. Supreme Court ruling today was probably the end of our country as we once knew it—or at least imagined it. Everything will change now. Aaron Copland’s “common man” has just been raped in some dark alley. The only hope is that the court will change its mind in future years. At one time, the high court ruled in favor of child labor, and it absolutely forbid it in a later ruling. What goes around can come around. In the meantime, what we need are more mainstream corporate industrialists. Taking applications.

Um, Cytocop? I appreciate how logical your analysis sounds, it’s just that . . . our government IS the government of the middle. The middle which spends an hour or two once every 2 years thinking about how to exercise their constitutional right to control our govt, which makes that decision based largely on the majority of sound bites and talking points they’ve absorbed, and immediately goes back to TV wonderland for another 2 years. They may grumble about what they see, get worked up about this or that, but they stay in the middle, and reelect the same crooks cycle after cycle, or occasionally replace them with a shiny new crook. This is history. The citizenry are uninformed, or misinformed, by the owners and renters of those crooks, who dominate public discourse as they always have (mass media is overwhelmingly owned by 6 LARGE corporations, and thanks to SCOTUS today, they have the same political rights that you and I do, but much better funding and PR). As Ecclesiastes said: “there is nothing new under the sun.” Want a democaracy? A republic? Any kind of representative govt? Like all things worth having, you’ll have to work for it. And, like all freedoms, you’ll have to fight for it too.

Bob: Ecclesiastes would been more accurate to say “There is nothing under the sun today that wasn’t there yesterday.” The single indisputable fact about our form of democracy is that what the people want is what they get. It doesn’t matter how much media bias there is or how much money corporations lay out in the trough. If the people get it in their minds to elect candidate B, then candidate B wins, at least until the corporations (or someone else) is able to rig the popular vote so well that they can turn a landslide into a loss.

It’s all very well to say “You have to fight for your freedom.” but if you ask ten different people a policy question, you get ten different answers and all of them think that they are making the country a better place for everyone or they think they are protecting a fundamental right. They ARE fighting for their freedom. They’re just pointing their guns the wrong way. We need a little less patriotism and a lot more education. Somewhere along the way, the politicians stopped trying to do what the public wanted and started doing what they wanted, then making the public want what they did. That’s much harder to stop than any dictatorship.

The public is NOT in the middle. They are being manipulated by two extreme points of view. Most of the ones who are actually in the middle don’t vote, so they are never a majority or they are fence-sitters, not wanting to commit until they can decide which of the two extremes to support, completely ignoring the fact that those aren’t the only options. The Tea Partiers and the Obamessiah followers are the ones who vote en-mass, and they are the most uneducated about politics and the most unaware of what is being done in their name, but they have most of the power….. and are certainly not “The Middle”.

Right on the money, Bob in AZ. We are indeed receiving the government we deserve. I imagine that once the Corporate States of America, LLC. get done lowering our standards of living enough that we become completely reliant on the largesse of our overlords for basic necessities, they’ll begin rooting out subversives and “transferring” them to less open environments. Ahhh, then the good times can roll, baby!

Or not.

Charles, I always like reading your thoughts on subjects here, but I’m gonna call you on your opinion of what constitutes the “Radical left”, since you seem to assert that they are the ones pushing for health care reform. Bill Clinton surely isn’t a radical leftist, nor do I know of anyone fitting that description in Congress. I’d be interested in seeing how Dennis Kucinich, or Pete Stark would even fit that designation.

It seems to me that the term “liberal” or “left” has been so successfully hijacked, by those opposed to strengthening the social safety net or labor justice, that anyone who shows a distaste for authoritarianism is now a radical leftist.

Back on topic, how many think that the guy on the video hasn’t traveled beyond the US borders in his entire life?

“That’s an easy one.” Yeah, no kidding, when you have no idea what the heck you’re talking about. Anyone spouting American exceptionalism in this day and age without specifying the parameters they used to judge, I lower my estimate of their IQ by at least 20 points.

Bob in AZ: It sounds like you’re trying to argue with me where all I can see is that we’re saying the same thing. I take it that you’re saying that once the U.S. has been reduced to Corporate States of LLC (as trog69 very accurately described it), the only option left to us the underclass will be armed revolt, French Revolution style probably. So we will see history repeat itself – if we’re lucky.

I thought I was the only one who did not understand the reference to the “radical left.” I thought the “radical left” was pretty much extinct, having died out sometime in the ’60’s – maybe even in the ’30’s? I see no evidence of its existence anywhere, certainly not as a voting bloc. Maybe there’s a group of a dozen or so individuals who constitute the “radical left.”

What we have in power now is the “radical right.” For the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Corporateworld to the extent that it has where the advancement of Corporateworld is more important than American sovereignty is the most radical thing I’ve seen in many a year. And it came from the Right, not the Left. Just watch Corporateworld demolish any attempt at regulation. It will be the Wild West on steroids: privatized gains, socialized losses. The transference of wealth from the middle class to the upper class the likes of which we’ve never seen before. And thanks to what the Supreme Court has done, the radical right will be in power probably permanently.

Cytocop, now that you’ve agreed with me about the “teabagger”-assisted, corporate-led realpolitik nightmare, let me soothe your fears, if only by degree; One of my fave writers, Ed Brayton of Dispatches from the Culture Wars, has pooh-poohed the idea that corporate money will flow more freely now, since they never slowed their spending during McCain-Feingold and other annoyances. Here’s the last para:

_Frankly, it may well be better to have companies endorsing candidates directly. At least the public will know who is endorsing them. That gives them more information than a disclaimer at the end of the “issue ad” that is clearly intended to endorse a candidate. It’s at least marginally better to have the ad expressly say that it was paid for by Dow Chemical rather than by “Americans for Happy Kittens and Grandmothers.”_

I made the comments in the video above. It’s interesting that the point missed is that I called slavery evil and merely asked that we focus as much on the overcoming of slavery as much as you on this website seem to want to only laser focus on the fact that we had the stain of slavery in the first place. I never advocated for the “whitewashing of history. I am always amused at the people who want to cite polls and “studies” about other countries and how great they are but continue live in a country that they would just as soon spit upon. I am proud of the things we have accomplished and invented in our history as Americans. However, I also know that we are flawed and imperfect human beings and have and will continue to make a mess of things from time to time. Maybe some of you should spend as much venom on the places in Africa that still continue the slave trade today as you have on America’s past sins of engaging in such a horrific practice. Maybe, since you all seem to be as concerned as I am about our fellow human beings you could spend some time denigrating the practice of murdering babies in their mother’s wombs (around 50 million to date).
Lastly, perhaps you would all feel better if you also invested the time in freeing our current and multi generations of future taxpayers from an “economic slavery” to an ever growing government cheered on by the likes of yourselves.

JasonMoore, please explain how wanting the students to learn about our history is exactly the same as wanting to “spit upon” the US? No one except you has proposed teaching the kids every wrong decision in US history. Lemme guess; You’re one of those who try to argue that the Civil War was only about “state’s rights”, and only marginally about slavery, right? The rest of your infantile rant I’ll leave to those with more patience to hopefully cure you of the that awful case of Teabag poisoning.

I would suggest getting out and seeing some of the rest of the world, in order to see why your “We’re number #1!”-cheerleading is kinda silly, but I doubt the experience would help, somehow.

Also, I haven’t heard anything in the news about this unconscionable mass-murder spree you mention. 50million babies killed? When, where? What? You mean abortions? Nope, sorry, no actual babies were harmed in the making of this talking point.

JasonMoore: The point about the US overcoming slavery is that it doesn’t make the US stand out except in a bad way. America was one of the LAST countries to abolish it and even then it was such a controversial subject that it helped touch off a civil war. Do you even know the first European country that abolished slavery? They are the ones who deserve the high praise. They were the one’s who took a step in the right direction when no one would have thought them any less for not doing so. The first state of the Union to abolish slavery was Vermont, after four whole countries went before, including England, and abolition wasn’t written into Federal law until 33 other countries (plus or minus two or three depending on what you consider a country) had already declared slavery illegal. As I said: Not our finest hour. It was good that we “overcame” slavery, but it wasn’t great. To be great you should be one of the leaders of the pack, not a reluctant follower.

So yeah… it’s nice that we abolished slavery and that should not be minimized, but it SHOULD have happened sooner and with much less turmoil, given the foundations that this country was built on. Saying that it is one of the things that makes America great is disingenuous to say the least. It would be more accurate to say that slavery held us back as a developing civilization and understanding why we held onto it for so long might help make us make a better choice the next time around, although judging by how we’re dealing with homosexuals, it doesn’t look like we’re doing a good job in that regard.

Pointing out the failings in our country is at least as important as pointing out the good things, for the reasons I stated. It’s all very well to SAY we are the greatest country in the world, and I would not dispute that. Our accomplishments speak for themselves, but our failures need to be studied so that we stop making so many of them. We should be honest about our mistakes and not try to turn them into something they are not.

And I spend plenty of time bitching about conditions in Africa, not that it makes any real difference. Mostly I’m preaching to the quior, or to people who aren’t going to listen because they’re making money off the conditions in Africa. As for our “economic slavery” that is entirely an evil we brought on ourselves and continue to perpetuate and it doesn’t at all compare with real slavery which, as you say, still happens.

Remembering the past is the key to avoiding repeating the bad parts, but you must first remember it as it happened, not as you wish it had happened.

Jason, you are building several straw man arguments at the same time. Do you know what a straw man argument is? You should look it up. It’s a logical fallacy.

In one post, you accused everyone here of being the types of people who’d spit on America, murder millions of babies in the womb, and promote “economic slavery.” You sound like a loon, do you know that?

Suppose there’s a guy named Joe that beats his wife. Not just a little, he beats her good and hard, regularly, for many years. Then, one day, he finally sees the light and stops beating her.

Instead of looking at Joe and thinking that he was pretty scummy for beating his wife, or even simply taking an objective stance and saying Joe beat his wife, without attaching any judgment to it, would you instead say Joe should be celebrated for having the integrity to stop beating his wife?

I for one would like to see the issue of slavery taught in schools for what it was, but I also would like to see the rest of our history taught for what it was and not spun by hollywood or any other agenda. The history of slavery is just that- history. The history of the native American subjugation by whites is also history, but we owe more to them than we have ever paid. The descendants of slaves have been fully integrated to the extent they wish for. Our president is a black man, and many of the leading business, sports and entertainment personalities are black. Opportunities exist, due to legislation already on the books, for black and native americans that do not exist for working class whites. Try getting a government contract if you are a white, working class male.
I submit to you now that the era of inequality has long since passsed. Let’s look into the future and stop self-flagellating over what transpired 150 years ago. The same people who belabor the slavery issue in America two generations after it was abolished wouldn’t lift a finger or write a single line about the slavery that still exists today in Africa and the middle east.
There is simply no earthly way to erase the past, and to continually stir it up for the purpose of political gain is getting increasingly inneffective as a vehicle of change.